I have a better LW in Ovechkin but Jagr is much better than Martinec and by far the best offensive player in the series. Larionov vs Delvecchio is very close imho, maybe slight edge to Delvecchio.
Overall - Advantage Sharks

Bob Gainey (A) - Pit Lepine - Jerry Toppazzini
vs
Brenden Morrow - Ryan Getzlaf - Trevor Linden
Gainey is obviously the best defensive forward in the series, but Morrow is better offensively and will not back down against Bob at all. Getzlaf has a very big physical advatnage over Lepine. Lepine's playoff record is pretty bad. Getzlaf is a far better playoff performer and a better offensive player. Linden is better offensive player than Toppazzini and is bigger.
Overall - Slight advantage Steelers

4th lines are hard to compare, though I am confident I have better defensive players with more grit. Though Russians might be better scorers, I do not expect them to outscore my 4th line given my superior defense corps and your 4th liners' limited minutes.

Shore is by far the best defenseman in the series. Davydov and Tsygakov are both very solid defensemen capable of sharing top pairing minutes with ease, but Pronovost is better than either of them. So I'd call this one a tie.

You have advantage in goal, but it's not a big advantage and I am confident Vachon will not lose any games for Steelers.
I have a big advantage at the Coach position, Al Arbour can, and will, outcoach Arkady Chernyshev with ease.

I wouldn't be so quick to say that Arbour will outcoach Chernyshev with ease. Chernyshev was the assistant coach for Tarasov for many, many years. To think that any of Tarasov's genius didn't rub off on Chernyshev is a little naive IMO. Chernyshev is a very respected Russian coach that simply worked in Tarasov's shadow.

I wouldn't be so quick to say that Arbour will outcoach Chernyshev with ease. Chernyshev was the assistant coach for Tarasov for many, many years. To think that any of Tarasov's genius didn't rub off on Chernyshev is a little naive IMO. Chernyshev is a very respected Russian coach that simply worked in Tarasov's shadow.

Yeah, I understand that, but don't underrate Chernyshev. Tarasov himself was quoted as saying that he and Chernyshev had many enlightening discussions with each other about coaching - clearly Chernyshev wasn't just the guy that patted players on the back. He had his own thoughts and ideas and he clearly had a profound effect on Tarasov. He's a good coach in my eyes.

Yeah, I understand that, but don't underrate Chernyshev. Tarasov himself was quoted as saying that he and Chernyshev had many enlightening discussions with each other about coaching - clearly Chernyshev wasn't just the guy that patted players on the back. He had his own thoughts and ideas and he clearly had a profound effect on Tarasov. He's a good coach in my eyes.

Yeah, a good coach. But what ATD coach is not a good coach? Cherry perhaps? Arbour is amongst the very best ever, so I do not think you can make a valid case for Chernyshev being close to Arbour.

I'd still rather have Tocchet than Lemieux. They played in similar era (Lemieux 87-03, Tocchet 85-02), so they're stats are comparable and Tocchet was a better offensive player. Lemieux has 0.67 playoff points per game compared to Tocchet's 0.77 playoff points per game. Obviously Lemieux has a Conn Smyth, but it came in a year where in the regular season he had 19 points in 45 games. In the regular season, Tocchet had 0.83 points per game while Lemieux had a 0.64 points per game. Lemieux's peak was 41 goals and 68 points in 92 while Tocchet's peak was 48 goals and 109 points. He put up 40 three times, twice on the Flyers. Lemieux scored 40 once. I don't think one Conn Smythe is enough to make Lemieux better. In "intangibles," they're about even. Lemieux was a one of the best agitators while Tocchet was one of the best power forwards.

In a 6 team NHL, you have better quality team mates, but also harder competition while in a 21-26 team NHL you have lesser quality team mates, but also easier competition.

Easier competition is very debatable. Average playerd from O6 era is not even close to average player from Linden's era. And Linden had to compete against more star/elite players than Toppazzini.
Also there are far more people trying to make the NHL, from all over the World, not just Canada or US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedberg

I'd still rather have Tocchet than Lemieux. They played in similar era (Lemieux 87-03, Tocchet 85-02), so they're stats are comparable and Tocchet was a better offensive player. Lemieux has 0.67 playoff points per game compared to Tocchet's 0.77 playoff points per game. Obviously Lemieux has a Conn Smyth, but it came in a year where in the regular season he had 19 points in 45 games. In the regular season, Tocchet had 0.83 points per game while Lemieux had a 0.64 points per game. Lemieux's peak was 41 goals and 68 points in 92 while Tocchet's peak was 48 goals and 109 points. He put up 40 three times, twice on the Flyers. Lemieux scored 40 once. I don't think one Conn Smythe is enough to make Lemieux better. In "intangibles," they're about even. Lemieux was a one of the best agitators while Tocchet was one of the best power forwards.

Lemieux was better than Tocchet in playoffs, despite the 0.1 PPG difference or whatever. Why? Because he scored big goals in big games, it is not just a question of how many goals you score, when you score them is important too.
His Conn Smythe means he is capable of being the best player on a Stanley Cup champion, that has got to count for something.
As for Tocchet's 100+ points season, he only scored so much because of Super Mario.

4th lines are hard to compare, though I am confident I have better defensive players with more grit. Though Russians might be better scorers, I do not expect them to outscore my 4th line given my superior defense corps and your 4th liners' limited minutes.

I would think they could certainly outscore three guys whose career highs are 43 points (Madden), 26 points (Pahlsson), and 37 points (Maltby).

This is the second series where it's been suggested my 4th line will see limited minutes. I don't really view this as the case, I actually think they are among the best fourth lines in the draft. They are everything I want in a fourth line; they can score, are good defensively and have some grit, plus they had real life chemistry.

Kings of the Ice:

Quote:

The Loktev-Almetov-Alexandrov trio was probably the first soviet line in which all the players had equal ability and where each supplemented the other. After receiving a pass from a linemate, Loktev would skate a little with the puck and then get it to Almetov, who was already racing up the left flank. Alexandrov, in the center slot, would then switch places with Almetov. The whole play took only a couple of seconds.

Coach Anatoli Tarasov:
On Almetov:

Quote:

"Perhaps sports fans who have seen our national team in action have noticed that whenever we have one man short, Alexander Almetov is sure to appear on the ice. When it comes to individual play, a question of holding on to the puck and beating off a superior force, Almetov is in a class by himself! He is not a solist, he is a star in the good sense of the word."

On Alexandrov:

Quote:

"I think that our Alexandrov, by his style of game, by his ability to keep a level head even in the most explosive situations, looks something like Maurice Richard, the great master of attack"

International Hockey Legends:
Alexandrov (one of only four players to net 50 in the Soviet League and is the 8th all-time leading scorer at the World Championships):

Quote:

Venjamin Alexandrov was considered the greatest Soviet player of his time. Alexandrov drew some incredible comparisons. He was dubbed "Bobrov 2" in Russia, after the first great Soviet star, Vsevolod Bobrov. The great Russian coach Anatoli Tarasov had another comparison though - Montreal Canadiens star Maurice "Rocket" Richard.

Loktev:

Quote:

Loktev, as coach Anatoli Tarasov puts it, was an original hockey player. He raced up his wing with puck well ahead of him. This must have caused the opposing defenseman to smack his lips in anticipation of a big body check or a turnover. However this was part of Loktev's arsenal. He lured in unsuspecting defenders this way, and then miraculously and almost without fail, he'd put on a beautiful deke to leave the bewildered defenseman up ice as he danced in on the lonely goal keeper. Loktev, who trained by himself in spare time, was a rough player as well, despite his tiny fram of 5'7" and 165 pounds. He never shied away from the boards and would fight for the puck until the whistle had blown. He was punished several times for rough play in his younger days by the Russian hockey federation. That punishment seemed to do him a ton of good, as he calmed down some. He remained aggressive but controlled, and became one of the all time greats.

Almetov:

Quote:

Almetov, like most Russians, was a well trained forward when it came to skating, puckhandling and passing, though he was never an elite scoring threat. Part of that was because Almetov was a superior defensive forward. In fact he was a mainstay on the Russian penalty killing units perhaps the best PK man of his generation.

-Toppazzini is definitely a superior offensive player to Trevor Linden. No "size of league" or "quality of competition" argument can change that.

I disagree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedberg

I would think they could certainly outscore three guys whose career highs are 43 points (Madden), 26 points (Pahlsson), and 37 points (Maltby).

This is the second series where it's been suggested my 4th line will see limited minutes. I don't really view this as the case, I actually think they are among the best fourth lines in the draft. They are everything I want in a fourth line; they can score, are good defensively and have some grit, plus they had real life chemistry.

Kings of the Ice:

...

Yeah, your Russian line is pretty good..on a big rink. On a smaller rink, they will not be able to keep the puck for so long and pass anytime they want, so they will not be nearly as effective. Maltby is a proven winner with a wicked shot and a lot of grit. Madden is a Selke-winning speedy center and Pahlsson can shadow just about anyone and has a Cup too, and he was arguably playoff MVP in 07. Actually, my fourth liners have 7 Cups between themselves, they know what it takes to win. Your Russian line cannot match their defensive play. My 4th line is purely defensive, with some PK duties. I do not expect them to score much, but I expect them to bring very good defense and experience.

Yeah, your Russian line is pretty good..on a big rink. On a smaller rink, they will not be able to keep the puck for so long and pass anytime they want, so they will not be nearly as effective. Maltby is a proven winner with a wicked shot and a lot of grit. Madden is a Selke-winning speedy center and Pahlsson can shadow just about anyone and has a Cup too, and he was arguably playoff MVP in 07. Actually, my fourth liners have 7 Cups between themselves, they know what it takes to win. Your Russian line cannot match their defensive play. My 4th line is purely defensive, with some PK duties. I do not expect them to score much, but I expect them to bring very good defense and experience.

I'm not buying the smaller ice argument. We don't know they'd be less effective on a smaller rink. I actually don't think they'd have much of a problem as they weren't soft (Loktev loved the board work). The Russian Line doesn't have to match your fourth line defensively (although Almetov-Loktev makes a great PK unit), my third line is the shut down unit (plus I have Kris Draper on the roster; he's a better player than any of Madden, Pahlson, or Maltby).